The reason the U.S. still exists and the USSR doesn't? Freedom. No matter how you look at it, we got it good and better here in America. The fact that we can openly and freely post about this subject on this forum on the internet is proof enough.

The reason the U.S. still exists and the USSR doesn't? Freedom. No matter how you look at it, we got it good and better here in America. The fact that we can openly and freely post about this subject on this forum on the internet is proof enough.

I think it had more to do with economic collapse based on very poor financial decisions. But Freedom does sound better.

Pretty much an example of old people who have no idea what they're talking about. The USSR went through multiple stages, and if they left in the 80's the world they left was completely different from the USSR at its origins. The mentality of the people in the US is dramatically different from Russians, back then and in the 80s. The focus of the courts is different; in your other thread recently, you saw an example of the universality of the law, of a girl being able to exploit the law to her own devices. As shocking as that is, it is a sign of a healthy system; where the authority and continuity of law supersedes the judge's and jury's personal feelings on the matter. The presence of capitalism as a prominent feature is dramatically different. the fact that there is a gap of multiple decades, with all of the innovations in technology and thought that comes with the passing of time, makes it nonequatable.

Oh, and you can tell them that another Russian called them out on that, if you feel like it. Their assertions are pretty much nothing but confirmation bias.

I'm fairly certain that they, having lived through the USSR (One was born in the 1930s) would know plenty about it. The younger of them is actually quite technologically savvy and in his 40s so he's not that old.

The fact is that the Soviets had a Constitution that granted some great rights on paper. The problem was it was JUST a piece of paper. If you can explain to me how it's different that the US Executive offices can conduct searches of your person, property or correspondence without a warrant ISN'T near enough as makes no difference to what the USSR did, I am all ears.

If you can explain to me how it's different that the US Executive offices can conduct searches of your person, property or correspondence without a warrant ISN'T near enough as makes no difference to what the USSR did, I am all ears.

How many people died in the 5 Year Plans?

The USA isn't anywhere close. You can knock off your bullshit illogically founded thought train now.

That's not what a continuum fallacy is...dismissing you for being too vague would be a continuum fallacy.

Ah you're right. Yours is more akin to a false dilemma. Sorry the wording was wrong.

In truth there exists a vast middle ground between the US of the 1950s and the USSR of the 1950s. To say we're not significantly closer to the USSR in terms of both economic policy AND authoritarian government is just sticking your head in the sand.

It wasn't even close to the biggest point in my post. It was just the most wordy due to quoting a large text of the soviet constitution. The biggest point of my post was how we are on a path to a much more authoritarian government. Dangerous precedents have been set.

Ah you're right. Yours is more akin to a false dilemma. Sorry the wording was wrong.

In truth there exists a vast middle ground between the US of the 1950s and the USSR of the 1950s. To say we're not significantly closer to the USSR in terms of both economic policy AND authoritarian government is just sticking your head in the sand.

The big thing is, Americans will be more inclined to go on a mass fucking rebellion if the US gov't attempted to pull some USSR shit.

We haven't so far... not after the government reserved the right to surveil and search us without warrants... not after they reserved the right to detain us without trial. Is there some breaking point you think we'll reach?

---------- Post added 2013-05-16 at 06:02 PM ----------

Originally Posted by TradewindNQ

Oh my god what is this "fallacy roulette?"

Does it matter what the fuck it's called? You're insinuating that there's no middle ground between authoritarian Russia and democratic America... and that even if there were we certainly aren't sitting on it.

---------- Post added 2013-05-16 at 06:04 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Rukentuts

How many people died in the 5 Year Plans?

The USA isn't anywhere close. You can knock off your bullshit illogically founded thought train now.

This has what, exactly, to do with the authoritarianism of the Soviet government in spite of the Constitution juxtaposed to the US?

It wasn't even close to the biggest point in my post. It was just the most wordy due to quoting a large text of the soviet constitution. The biggest point of my post was how we are on a path to a much more authoritarian government. Dangerous precedents have been set.

I took "most unnerving" to mean it was your biggest point.

Still, why would you intentionally use a phrase you know has not meaning due to the twisting of the source in your argument? Unless, of course, you were trying to provoke a reaction knowing how certain people would react to that phrase.

And sitting here quoting logical fallacies at each other is not really productive either. The US won't end up just like the USSR. The countries are too different, the two cultures are too different, and frankly it's just nonsensical to think we'd end up just like they did.

I'm fairly certain that they, having lived through the USSR (One was born in the 1930s) would know plenty about it. The younger of them is actually quite technologically savvy and in his 40s so he's not that old.

The fact is that the Soviets had a Constitution that granted some great rights on paper. The problem was it was JUST a piece of paper. If you can explain to me how it's different that the US Executive offices can conduct searches of your person, property or correspondence without a warrant ISN'T near enough as makes no difference to what the USSR did, I am all ears.

If they lived through it, than they should probably know better. But then again, two random people aren't exactly the most reliable sources of information.

As for your second statement, it's... fairly hard to explain to someone who has not experienced it. Imagine a system like this:the law works differently with every town you go to. Some areas are understaffed, and the police are nothing more than ineffectual tools who let crime run rampant. Other areas are horribly authoritarian and will arrest you for anything and everything they can merely because they like it. It's one of the reasons why car cams became so popular (as well as insurance fraud prevention). The entire legal system, from the top to the bottom, consists of people pretty much doing whatever they feel is "right," whether it be right by them or the community. Controls within the legal system are minimal and basically consist of "if you don't embaress people higher up you're fine." This is the Russian legal system as it is. I'm not even going to touch on the differences between the beginning of the USSR and modern day America because trying to equate them is pretty much about as ridiculous as you can get in political science and history.

Last edited by Kasierith; 2013-05-16 at 06:07 PM.

“A fool is not a person who does not know something. Rather, a fool is a person who is given information but who chooses to ignore what he is given based on how he wants things to be, rather than how things are."

We haven't so far... not after the government reserved the right to surveil and search us without warrants... not after they reserved the right to detain us without trial. Is there some breaking point you think we'll reach?

Define detain, define surveil.

Any true breaking point would probably result from mass segregation of any group really, and pardon the Godwin, but shit like a "Final Solution" would probably cause a mass shitstorm. Also guns.

Does it matter what the fuck it's called? You're insinuating that there's no middle ground between authoritarian Russia and democratic America... and that even if there were we certainly aren't sitting on it.

No I'm not.

Aside from pointing out your slippery slope argument I haven't really said anything because knowing you I'd be better off flaying my dick with a pen knife.

Still, why would you intentionally use a phrase you know has not meaning due to the twisting of the source in your argument? Unless, of course, you were trying to provoke a reaction knowing how certain people would react to that phrase.

And sitting here quoting logical fallacies at each other is not really productive either. The US won't end up just like the USSR. The countries are too different, the two cultures are too different, and frankly it's just nonsensical to think we'd end up just like they did.

That's the point. We tend to think of what happened in the USSR as something that couldn't happen to us. We have a constitution, after all. But what good is that piece of paper when executive orders and congressional legislation (and not amendments) can ignore it? What's the difference between the USSR picking and choosing which parts of its constitution the Law Enforcement would honor... and the US picking and choosing which parts of its constitution LE will honor?

---------- Post added 2013-05-16 at 06:11 PM ----------

Originally Posted by TradewindNQ

No I'm not.

Aside from pointing out your slippery slope argument I haven't really said anything because knowing you I'd be better off flaying my dick with a pen knife.

There remains no slippery slope argument. I never suggested we were completely turning into the USSR. Since when is juxtaposing similarities between a defunct nation and a current nation a logical fallacy?

There remains no slippery slope argument. I never suggested we were completely turning into the USSR. Since when is juxtaposing similarities between a defunct nation and a current nation a logical fallacy?

Because the similarities are only there because you so desperately want to see them. See confirmation bias.

“A fool is not a person who does not know something. Rather, a fool is a person who is given information but who chooses to ignore what he is given based on how he wants things to be, rather than how things are."